The court found that a highly respected and hugely experienced histopathologist expert witness, who was overburdened with work, had made errors in his examination of the forensic material and closed his mind to possible or probable accidental causes for the injuries identified. 

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham v G [2024] EWHC 2200 (Fam) 

Experts, in particular medical experts, are likely to be familiar with experts’ discussions that take place after the exchange of reports. This case referred to a circumstance more commonly, or perhaps seldom otherwise, encountered in the Technology and Construction Court. 

The judge in this patent case found that the claimants’ gene therapy expert had developed, quite possibly guided by lawyers, the understanding that the primary duty of an expert witness is not to say anything that may damage the instructing party’s case if it can be avoided.

The defendant’s spinal cord injury expert in this case agreed early on in his cross-examination that he had lost all objectivity and independence in the case, while the defendant’s physiotherapy and accommodation experts were criticised by the judge for adopting more partisan approaches in their later evidence.

Range of Opinion is the focus of the 5th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast. We catch up with Colin Holburn, Chair of the EWI Membership Committee, to find out about the sorts of issues his committee sees in the expert reports submitted to them, before hearing advice from Colin and Lady Justice Simler on how to ensure you meet the requirement to provide a range of opinion. 

Many expert witnesses, primarily in medico-legal work, use a third-party organisation to help them in their practice. If you use an organisation which invoices the instructing solicitor for your services, you should be aware of legal developments which might affect the information that organisation needs to provide, in order to recover their bill as part of the legal costs recovered at the end of the case.

The judge found that it was without justification and entirely unecessary for an expert to question the opposing expert's professionalism and motives in selecting evidence, noting that this approach was unhelpful for the tribunal. 

One of the key roles of the Expert Witness Institute is to ensure that policy, rule and regulatory changes are informed by the experience of our members and the needs of the expert witness community and the wider justice system. In this update, we discuss our work in this area over the last 3 months.   

On 1 October 2024, the latest amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules will come into force.

The Family Procedure Rule Committee is consulting on a new draft Practice Direction 27A on court bundles.